HC Questions Trial Court Findings in Excise Policy Discharge Order

On Monday, the Delhi High Court held that several observations made by the trial court while discharging former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, former Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia, K. Kavitha, and others in the Delhi excise policy case appear to be legally flawed. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma stayed the trial court’s direction initiating departmental proceedings against the investigating officer of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), noting that such strong findings at the stage of framing of charge raise serious legal concerns.

The controversy stems from a February 27 order passed by Special Judge Jitendra Singh, who discharged the accused in the CBI case relating to the Delhi Excise Policy 2021–22. The trial court had concluded that the prosecution’s case failed to withstand judicial scrutiny, observing that the CBI attempted to build a conspiracy narrative primarily on the basis of approver statements and speculative assumptions. It also issued critical remarks against the investigating officer and directed departmental action against him for allegedly conducting an unfair investigation.

The Court indicated that such findings may have gone beyond the limited scope of scrutiny permissible at the stage of charge. Justice Sharma observed that the trial court’s evaluation of witness statements and approver testimonies required deeper legal consideration and could not form the basis of sweeping conclusions at that preliminary stage. The Court noted that “such scathing remarks… concluding that the investigating officer has abused his official position… are prima facie foundationally misconceived especially when made at the stage of charge itself.”

Consequently, the Court stayed the direction ordering departmental proceedings against the officer and also asked the trial court to defer proceedings in the connected money laundering case.

Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.